Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> > This has been a problem in the past. I'd generally ask that, if a patch
> > which was discussed on -hackers gets rejected on -patches, that discussion
> > be brought back to -hackers. Often the people who supported the original
> > feature are not on -patches and then are unpleasantly surprised when the
> > feature they though was accepted doesn't show up in the next version.
>
> Um, if they're not reading -patches, why would they think the feature
> had been accepted, or even submitted? In any case, when we reject a
> patch, it's not usually a conclusion that will get reversed just because
> more people are involved in the discussion. The people who might
> actually be able to *fix* the patch are probably reading -patches.
But there may be people in -hackers who can *convince* those on -patches
that the patch should get fixed and not dropped (e.g. the case at hand).
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
